Saipan PSC

Moderators: Laffe, Vis Bellica

edleland
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 9:18 pm

Re: Saipan PSC

Post by edleland »

I’m on the building both sides train as well. However, building an opponent for something you already have helps Built Japanese after I already had Soviets with a fair bit of EW kit so had an existing opponent force in hand. Now building tropical Brits to fight either Japanese or the shedload of FJ I have...

Munin
Posts: 1137
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 7:49 pm

Re: Saipan PSC

Post by Munin »

Unless you're lucky enough to belong to a well-organized club, building both sides is just the cross-to-bear with historical minis.

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 7528
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Saipan PSC

Post by Truscott Trotter »

Have 2 regular opponents who both built Aussie armies before I could blink so Japanese it was 😊

On the positive side it forced me to do a lot of research into stuff I had no previous idea of...the Japanese army.
Now I want to do Chinese forces too! 😉

PS Last I heard from Rich is everything but China /Mongolia will be in Far East book.

edleland
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 9:18 pm

Re: Saipan PSC

Post by edleland »

TT - I think some Chinese may make it into the Far East Handbook, although I think you are right about the Mongolian stuff. I just wish someone made figures for X-Force Chinese Forces in India!

Ed

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 7528
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Saipan PSC

Post by Truscott Trotter »

Were those the ones equipped by the US?

Neil Todd
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 11:59 pm

Re: Saipan PSC

Post by Neil Todd »

This book is sounding better and better :)

edleland
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 9:18 pm

Re: Saipan PSC

Post by edleland »

TT - Trained by US, but had a strange mix of British & US gear and a unique TO&E including 2 60mm Mortars in each platoon. 3 x 12 man squads with a Bren each plus a weapons squad with the 60mm Mortars

sackatatties
Posts: 456
Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2014 9:50 am
Location: Dunfermline, Scotland

Post by sackatatties »

The Chinese that retreated into India were equipped with British uniforms and weapons but wore shorts and Puttees (the leg binding type). Some of the Chinese that came across later from China were equipped by the US, others remained as they were. All of the new equipment was funded by the British iirc (including the stuff provided by the US).
The Chinese army in Burma was proficient, battle hardened and well led (but unfortunately saddled with Vinegar Joe) however it lacked artillery and heavy equipment in sufficient quantity. Their senior officers were also well educated and effective.

An excellent book is 'Kangzhan' by Leland Ness which has everything you'd ever need to know about the Chinese army of the period.

I'd be surprised if all of the Chinese variants were included in the Far East handbook, but hopefully the westernised ones in Burma? The Kwantung Army too?
You never know.

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 7528
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Saipan PSC

Post by Truscott Trotter »

I recently saw some pictures of Chinese forces in India/Burma with Stuarts and even Shermans

sackatatties
Posts: 456
Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2014 9:50 am
Location: Dunfermline, Scotland

Re: Saipan PSC

Post by sackatatties »

From Kangzhan

'It was not until June 1943 that the US assigned tank production against Chinese requests, in the form of 1,000 M3A3 light tanks. In fact, only 536 were actually shipped from the US, and of those only 100 actually made it to Chinese forces in Burma before the end of the war. In their place the British provided 116 Shermans from their stocks in India in late 1944. The US-built tanks served in Burma but do not appear to have engaged in combat in China prior to the end of the war. The mixture of US, British, German, French, Italian, and Soviet tanks made maintenance difficult, especially given the lack of spare parts deliveries after 1939 for all but the US-made tanks, and those only operated in Burma prior to 1945. In any case, with endemic fuel shortages, the tanks could not be extensively used, and played little role in the fighting."

"Training and reorganization of the tank group took place during July– October 1944. The opportunity was taken to issue a new series of organization tables for the armored force in India/Burma. The Universal carriers had arrived with no spare parts and had been kept running, in decreasing numbers, by cannibalization, and they were eliminated from the force structure. The light tank company consisted, as before, of three platoons each with five M3A3 light tanks, each tank commanded by an officer. The company headquarters provided two more tanks for command purposes, a small dismounted scout section (presumably actually intended for headquarters security), and service units. A light tank battalion had three such companies with fire support provided by an assault gun battery, plus service support elements.

The assault gun battery was built around two platoons, each with two 75mm field howitzers drawn by 6 x 6 trucks. The battery held only four SCR-510 short-range FM radios for communications and was presumably used mostly in the direct or semi-direct fire mode. The service company had a recovery platoon with two 10-ton wheeled wreckers to bring back damaged tanks, a maintenance platoon, and a quartermaster (transportation) platoon. The battalion headquarters company included a light AA platoon with five .50-cal. machine guns, a pioneer platoon, and a dismounted reconnaissance platoon (with 37mm AT guns but no transport) that probably served at least as often as a guard platoon for the battalion headquarters.

In late 1944 the 1st and 2nd Battalions were ordered converted to medium tank battalions, while the 3rd Battalion joined the tank group as a light tank battalion. The organization table for a medium tank battalion was published at the same time as that for the light battalion and was almost identical except for the need for one additional crewman per tank. The major changes were the replacement of the 75mm howitzers in the assault gun battery with 105mm howitzers and the addition of cargo trucks to the service company for the additional fuel and larger ammunition to be carried. In fact, the two battalions never received enough equipment for the conversion.

Through most of 1945 the Provisional Tank Group had only 24 M4A4 Shermans, a dozen per battalion. The the rest of its strength comprised 145 M3A3 lights, along with a few dozen more M3A3 without turrets, and 18 half-track personnel carriers. The commander of the Provisional Tank Group remained an American, as did many of the group staff officers. The American officers were of the opinion that the Chinese line officers were making progress in the combat leadership of armored units, but that the staff officers were “absolutely incapable of coping with supply and logistics” without American supervision and that “any Chinese armored units which are formed will have to be backed up by American supply agencies, and assisted by trained maintenance specialists for several years.”

Post Reply